Sky Blue Sports & Leisure 2013 accounts (6 Viewers)

[torchomatic]

But what's the point in having a Rolls Royce if you can't afford to tax, insure and put petrol in it?

skock, horror. you'll be telling me next that a rolls royce isn't the same cost to buy and run as a hillman imp. come to your senses man

 

---

[Nick]

Depends how you define these terms; support or follow.
As very very few attend practically every game most of us are a mixture of the two. We are fans of the club, our attendance at any given time is down to all sorts of reasons and probably beyond accurate analysis.

Let's be honest the posters on here have been fans over different time scales, live all over the place, have had their own experiences as fans, have their own unique commitments away from the club....we all have our own take on various episodes in our history. We all have our own solutions to problems.

Ultimately we are all fans, non can say we are better or more worthy than another. Non of us know how our personal situations will change in the future.

My point is we have a fantastic fan base, at the moment it is under utilised by the club.

Of course, personal situations will always change how much you can go and watch, having kids, working, illness etc etc. I agree the club could and should do much better PR to get fans watching (even at Sixfields).

 

[lewys33]

skock, horror. you'll be telling me next that a rolls royce isn't the same cost to buy and run as a hillman imp. come to your senses man

I think it goes something like "you get what you pay for"

Unfortunately some would rather listen to the TF bullshit feed than open their eyes.

 

[GaryPendrysEyes]

But what's the point in having a Rolls Royce if you can't afford to tax, insure and put petrol in it?

But they signed a finance contact for tax, insurance and petrol... then moaned at the finance company and didnt pay.

 

[lewys33]

But what's the point in having a Rolls Royce if you can't afford to tax, insure and put petrol in it?

It looks good on the mantlepiece?

 

[oldskyblue58]

You know the one thing not picked up on is that the staff costs exceed the turnover by 468k (ie are 107% of turnover). Put interest, rent etc to one side for a minute..... there is no way a business is viable doing that.

 

[Nick]

Yes they didn't include matchday costs in the free rent offer.

Who would have though matchday costs would cost more at a 32,000 seater state of the art stadium over a shitty tin shed in Northampton with 1/5 of the attendance?

I think their argument was that it wasn't actually free rent at all.

ACL are mixing match day costs and rent.
At Northampton, Rent includes; all stadium related first team match day services including pitch maintenance, utilities, refuse collection and covers the following facilities - the pitch, the stadium, the stadium seating, the changing rooms, hospitality suites and banqueting areas, match day staff facilities, media facilities.

The stadium also provide all catering staff, all grounds men. The licensee (the club) separately provide stewards, crowd doctor, crowd ambulance, player ambulance.

The ACL proposal comprised a license fee of per match plus match day costs, defined as charges to maintain and manage pitch, utilities, waste, hygiene, match day stadium maintenance salaries, statutory service contracts. The total is north of 12K per match. This is, of course, rent/facility fee.​

 

[torchomatic]

Agree there. It was at 125% when Richardson was here.

You know the one thing not picked up on is that the staff costs exceed the turnover by 468k (ie are 107% of turnover). Put interest, rent etc to one side for a minute..... there is no way a business is viable doing that.

 

[lewys33]

You know the one thing not picked up on is that the staff costs exceed the turnover by 468k (ie are 107% of turnover). Put interest, rent etc to one side for a minute..... there is no way a business is viable doing that.

Mcsheffrey was a robbing bastard!

 

[lewys33]

I think their argument was that it wasn't actually free rent at all.

I know what the point was, but my point still stands.

 

[skybluetony176]

But what's the point in having a Rolls Royce if you can't afford to tax, insure and put petrol in it?

i guess its what you're willing to work for. if you only ever aim to own a cortina then build a 12,500 seater stadium, 15,000 i guess is an upgrade to a granada. but only a base model no flashy ghia badges. so i guess the ricoh is probably a jaguar in the big scheme of things. a rolls royce is probably a bit too ambitious for us but a jag would be nice if someone was willing to put the effort in.

 

[fernandopartridge]

You know the one thing not picked up on is that the staff costs exceed the turnover by 468k (ie are 107% of turnover). Put interest, rent etc to one side for a minute..... there is no way a business is viable doing that.

Cheers osb - I'm no financial expert but I started a thread saying exactly that a few hours ago - of course this is all SISU's fault rather than a symptom of systemic problems within the game.

 

[Grendel]

skock, horror. you'll be telling me next that a rolls royce isn't the same cost to buy and run as a hillman imp. come to your senses man

Fixed overheads vary not that much actually.

 

[Nick]

You know the one thing not picked up on is that the staff costs exceed the turnover by 468k (ie are 107% of turnover). Put interest, rent etc to one side for a minute..... there is no way a business is viable doing that.

Wouldn't this still show the "bomb squad"? It will be interesting to see with this squad and if anybody has been laid off that percentage.

 

[Godiva]

Wouldn't this still show the "bomb squad"? It will be interesting to see with this squad and if anybody has been laid off that percentage.

They weren't the bomb squad then - they were actually playing.

 

[shmmeee]

Comparing matchday costs at Sixfields is stupid. They have all the stuff for Northampton ready and we'll just be paying a little on top to use their stuff.

I'd rather see Sisu put out the expected match day costs for the new stadium so we can judge like for like. And as has been said, even with the matchday costs (hell, even on the old lease deal) we're worse at Sixfields than the Ricoh.

Why on earth did they attempt the rent strike before planning the stadium? You don't make business decisions like that at a moments notice.

 

[dongonzalos]

Cheers osb - I'm no financial expert but I started a thread saying exactly that a few hours ago - of course this is all SISU's fault rather than a symptom of systemic problems within the game.

Weird can't even see the word 'SISU' mentioned once in the replies you got to that thread.

 

[Nick]

They weren't the bomb squad then - they were actually playing.

I just meant the high earners. Would that have taken a chunk out as I can't imagine any of the new signings being on McSheffrey wages.

 

[shmmeee]

Cheers osb - I'm no financial expert but I started a thread saying exactly that a few hours ago - of course this is all SISU's fault rather than a symptom of systemic problems within the game.

Well it sort of is if your whole justification for the cost cutting that preceded it was to bring the wage bill down so it's inline with FFP.

I think most could've almost accepted the relegation season if it meant the club was in a better financial position. Turns out it actually put us in a worse position.

 

[RoboCCFC90]

It should have been put to them that they could quite easily go about building a new stadium whilst still playing at the Ricoh on an interim basis, incurring much less financial distress in the process. The premise of owning our own ground is something most of us would agree with but the way this idea has been executed is horrendous.

As Fernando stated recently I believe they attempted to agree this with ACL but it was rejected.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Godiva]

I just meant the high earners. Would that have taken a chunk out as I can't imagine any of the new signings being on McSheffrey wages.

True - and Leon Clarke was on 8k/w. They are pushing down player wages as fast as they can.

 

[shmmeee]

As Fernando stated recently I believe they attempted to agree this with ACL but it was rejected.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Again. This was during a time where noone could guess what was to come.

Why didn't Sisu just started building the new ground? ACL would've been all "lol alright then" and then they can pull the ole Golden Share switcharoo when the new ground is finished.

 

[oldskyblue58]

Wouldn't this still show the "bomb squad"? It will be interesting to see with this squad and if anybody has been laid off that percentage.

I would think so Nick.

This season the playing side costs will have dropped certainly but there is still the other staff to cover, despite the 300+ stewards they wont actually be a major cost (or as many this season.), some commercial staff gone etc . There are also payments to settle the bomb squad and others still going on. So the wages cost wont bottom out this current year to 31/05/14.

However the Turnover will also have dropped significantly. Gate income down from £3m to say £500k there will be the cup money and cup prize money say another £500k (?). TV payments a bit of sponsorship, some commercial money from the shop etc say £500k then add on player sales £1m(?) For the sake of argument call it £3m in total. I would reckon they would spend that on staff wages alone. So anything else spent is losses including the mounting interest bill. So minimum £3m + losses for year to 31/05/14 ?

That loss is cash paid out so if not covered by income it has to be covered by further loans ........ so net liabilities heading towards £47 before they issue shares to convert loans and things. Not my idea of making things better.

Then on top of that the funding and professional costs associated with the new stadium if it happens ....... Which in addition to actually building finance will need further working capital whilst they build the income streams. FFP is based on the income in the year so will take a year in the new stadium before we benefit from the new income streams and that's after waiting what another 3 years or likely more to actually get it built - FFP is now not in three years time.

It is hard to see very much positive from the info in the accounts and coming out of the club - just my opinion

 

[Nick]

As Fernando stated recently I believe they attempted to agree this with ACL but it was rejected.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Exactly, it seems like they rejected because they thought they had the upper hand with the lease? Nobody has an issue with this though?

 

[Nick]

Again. This was during a time where noone could guess what was to come.

Why didn't Sisu just started building the new ground? ACL would've been all "lol alright then" and then they can pull the ole Golden Share switcharoo when the new ground is finished.

They still said no though when CCFC said "we will build our own stadium, can we play here while we do it".

They had the issue of planning etc though? If they could have just built a stadium without ACL knowing and then dropping the bomb at the end of the season they could have, could ACL have readied for it if they had waited that long?

 

[RoboCCFC90]

Thanks for posting that up Robbo

My take on that article is that it is the club saying this is the questions we want you to ask so that we can make the statements we want to. Not exactly probing are they.

Final question on the loans I have for them. If they are not proper loans then why has it not all been converted to share capital? because that would immediately improve the appearance of the balance sheet and make the club look more financially sound, reduce overheads because no interest to pay, improve profitability (at least reduce losses) etc. If not loans what is stopping them doing that because apparently they are not looking to take the money out ..............:thinking about:

I would hazard a guess to answer your question OSB, if Sisu converted the figure you previously stated you aren't putting off people buying the Club as much as you could via keeping things the way that they are in such a way that suits you.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[covcity4life]

Again. This was during a time where noone could guess what was to come.

Why didn't Sisu just started building the new ground? ACL would've been all "lol alright then" and then they can pull the ole Golden Share switcharoo when the new ground is finished.

you dont always have to make excuses for the council you know.

 

[RoboCCFC90]

Again. This was during a time where noone could guess what was to come.

Why didn't Sisu just started building the new ground? ACL would've been all "lol alright then" and then they can pull the ole Golden Share switcharoo when the new ground is finished.

Would you of felt better about them doing it that way then not doing it in a honest yet painful manner?

At the moment you have the Club stating "We are doing this, that and the other" but you'd of been happy if they turned around one day and said "Fuck you ACL we are moving into Legoland next season, it's already built, we never consulted fans on location, design, etc and they have to live with it?"


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[shmmeee]

Exactly, it seems like they rejected because they thought they had the upper hand with the lease? Nobody has an issue with this though?

Not really. We STILL don't really believe the new ground stuff. The majority view was (and is) that this was an attempt to distress ACL. Why should ACL sign their own death warrant?

Sisu should've called the reduction in rent a win and moved on. Instead they've got greedy and probably killed the club for the foreseeable future.

It's the seat of your pants leadership that I have an issue with.

You want to fuck over ACL and move to a new ground because it's better for the club? Fine.

You want to get out of the lease through dodgy legal manoeuvres? Fine.

You want to spoil a relationship with the local council and charity that have long been supportive of the club? Fine.

But why on earth move the club to Sixfields? Why do it all last minute? Why not do it properly and ensure the long term health of the club is good? Why destroy the first two seasons where we actually might have won something and gained fans for the first time in 30 years by putting us into admin?

There was no pressing reason at all to go on rent strike last year (remembering of course that the only reason for the rent strike was to start into motion the events that lead us to admin).

The plan is questionable morally, but it's downright suicidal in terms of execution.

There's a reason hedge funds don't run companies long term. It's because the mindset required is completely at odds with a successful long term business.

 

[oldskyblue58]

I would hazard a guess to answer your question OSB, if Sisu converted the figure you previously stated you aren't putting off people buying the Club as much as you could via keeping it in it suits you.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Not a bad guess I would think Robbo but what is in the best interests of the club ? Keep being told people (including TF & ML) are only interested in what is best for the club. Keeping the loans is to SISU's benefit not the Clubs and that is a separate interest to CCFC. There is always the words "No its not for sale" quite simple, clear and to the point. Also wouldn't expect their "Bank" Arvo to convert much more than they have so that's a barrier to any potential purchaser that wont go away

 

[Nick]

Not really. We STILL don't really believe the new ground stuff. The majority view was (and is) that this was an attempt to distress ACL. Why should ACL sign their own death warrant?

Sisu should've called the reduction in rent a win and moved on. Instead they've got greedy and probably killed the club for the foreseeable future.

It's the seat of your pants leadership that I have an issue with.

You want to fuck over ACL and move to a new ground because it's better for the club? Fine.

You want to get out of the lease through dodgy legal manoeuvres? Fine.

You want to spoil a relationship with the local council and charity that have long been supportive of the club? Fine.

But why on earth move the club to Sixfields? Why do it all last minute? Why not do it properly and ensure the long term health of the club is good? Why destroy the first two seasons where we actually might have won something and gained fans for the first time in 30 years by putting us into admin?

There was no pressing reason at all to go on rent strike last year (remembering of course that the only reason for the rent strike was to start into motion the events that lead us to admin).

The plan is questionable morally, but it's downright suicidal in terms of execution.

There's a reason hedge funds don't run companies long term. It's because the mindset required is completely at odds with a successful long term business.

I do think it is a huge game of poker, but ACL have suddenly changed a lot in their stance without the lease haven't they? I agree that things may be dodgy, but if the club said "we can't afford to play here, we are going to build are own but can we play here for 3 years" and ACL said "no" and then tried to get lower rent but couldn't and then SISU wriggle out of a lease and move us away (I don't agree with morally) but then suddenly everything changes and ACL aren't in control now.

It is all one massive poker game between ACL / Council and SISU I think. I think ACL were holding the cards with the lease agreement but SISU turned the tables.

I do hope IF sisu are gambling with the club, that it pays off and doesn't backfire and we lose our club.

 

[RoboCCFC90]

Not a bad guess I would think Robbo but what is in the best interests of the club ? Keep being told people (including TF & ML) are only interested in what is best for the club. Keeping the loans is to SISU's benefit not the Clubs and that is a separate interest to CCFC. There is always the words "No its not for sale" quite simple, clear and to the point. Also wouldn't expect their "Bank" Arvo to convert much more than they have so that's a barrier to any potential purchaser that wont go away

That's the question many have wondered for a long time, are Sisu going through all this for themselves or for the Club? I would say both, but I don't disagree with a particular comment in the quotes from CCFC in which the Club said something along the lines of "The Club needs to own it's own stadium to control it's destiny". This comment to me says they are thinking about the Club and destiny is what you make of it as we all know, how can that be when your stuck in a tenancy agreement in which you have no control over?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[shmmeee]

Would you of felt better about them doing it that way then not doing it in a honest yet painful manner?

At the moment you have the Club stating "We are doing this, that and the other" but you'd of been happy if they turned around one day and said "Fuck you ACL we are moving into Legoland next season, it's already built, we never consulted fans on location, design, etc and they have to live with it?"


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Firstly the last thing CCFC have been in this is "honest". First it was about rent. Then lower rent. Then revenues. Then freehold. Then matchday costs. They intentionally kept their plans for CCFC Ltd hidden until the last minute. They deliberately timed it so the FL had to act.

I'd have had just as many issues with their methodology. I'm a person with strong morals in certain areas and I don't like the club I associate with going against them.

However, I'd probably have a season ticket there and be a fan, if a slightly unhappy one. As I expect would many others. More to the point, in our first two seasons in League 1 we wouldn't have lost 20 points and we wouldn't have lost 9000 fans and we wouldn't have lost a significant chunk of our wage budget.

We could realistically been in the Championship, and far more fans would be supportive of the owners after a promotion.

It was badly handled all around, even if you agree with the tactics they used (which I don't) and the overall aims (which I don't).

 

[RoboCCFC90]

Exactly, it seems like they rejected because they thought they had the upper hand with the lease? Nobody has an issue with this though?

ACL must believe they have the upper hand hence why they have left the door open to the Club, my guess would be that ACL believe it will be nigh-on-impossible for the Club to build a new Stadium.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[covcity4life]

its all about getting CCFC in a position to move forward.

rent/freehold its all same thing, change is needed to help the club.

this was always gonna happen at some point. be it these owners or some new ones down the line.